The post AMAA honors Rev. Dr. Vahan H. Tootikian and Dr. Nurhan Helvacian appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post AMAA honors Rev. Dr. Vahan H. Tootikian and Dr. Nurhan Helvacian appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post AMAA holds 107th annual meeting in New Jersey appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post AMAA holds 107th annual meeting in New Jersey appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post We speak Armenian to babies after four generations in the diaspora appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post We speak Armenian to babies after four generations in the diaspora appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post Finding renewed purpose in the Armenian Museum of America appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post Finding renewed purpose in the Armenian Museum of America appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post In memory of Walter Vartanian appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>Born in Brighton and raised in Cambridge, Walter was the son of Armenian immigrants whose experiences helped shape his appreciation for education, perseverance, and opportunity. He graduated from Boston University and earned his law degree from Boston University School of Law in 1959, where he served on the Law Review.
Among the early immigration attorneys practicing in Boston, Walter devoted more than 55 years to representing individuals, families and businesses navigating the American immigration system. As the son of immigrants, he brought both professional expertise and a personal understanding of the challenges faced by those seeking to establish their lives in the United States. His work on the 1990 landmark case Matter of Delitizer changed how employment-based immigrant petitions are adjudicated and led to the nickname “Delitizer” by his peers.
In 1960, Walter established the Law Firm of Walter G. Vartanian. Forty years later, it became Vartanian & Vartanian with the addition of his son Gregory, with whom he practiced alongside for another 20 years. He served as president of the New England chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the Cambridge-Arlington-Belmont Bar Association. He was a member of the Massachusetts Bar Association and admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the United States.
Deeply connected to his Armenian heritage, Walter was active in numerous community organizations. He served as vice president and secretary of the Parish Council of Holy Trinity Armenian Church of Greater Boston, as a board member of the National Association for Armenian Studies and Research, and as chairman of the Council of Armenian Executives. He was also a member of the Knights of Vartan and the Masons.
Beyond his professional life, Walter possessed a keen intellect, an extraordinary memory, and a lifelong interest in history, politics, sports and world affairs. He enjoyed lively conversation, spirited debate and sharing stories, often accompanied by his quick wit and distinctive sense of humor. His generosity and willingness to help others were equally characteristic of the man he was.
In 1962, Walter married his beloved wife, Anne Rose Ghougasian, of New York, at Holy Trinity Armenian Church in Cambridge. Together they raised three children and shared a life rich in family, friendship, travel and Armenian traditions.
Above all, Walter cherished his family. He took great pride in his children and grandchildren, valuing the time they spent together and the traditions passed from one generation to the next. Although he experienced the profound losses of his wife Anne and daughter Regina, his devotion to family remained a constant throughout his life.
In his later years, Walter recorded memories of his childhood, family history, career, and travels. Reflecting on his life, he expressed gratitude for his parents, sister, wife, children, grandchildren, and friends. He summarized his remarkable journey with characteristic simplicity: “Quite a trip.”
Walter was the beloved husband of the late Anne Rose (Ghougasian) Vartanian; devoted father of Gregory Vartanian and his wife Sonia, Carol Khalarian and her husband Alex, and the late Regina Najarian and her husband Berj; loving grandfather of Sebu, Avi, Nora, Armen, Eva and Natalie; and brother of the late Araxie Vartanian. He is also survived by many loving relatives and friends in Boston, New York, and beyond.
Visiting hours were held Monday, Oct. 26, 2026, from 5 to 8 p.m. at Aram Bedrosian Funeral Home, 558 Mount Auburn St., Watertown, Massachusetts.
Funeral services were held Tuesday, Oct. 27, 2026, at 11 a.m. at Holy Trinity Armenian Church, 145 Brattle St., Cambridge, Massachusetts. Interment followed at Mount Auburn Cemetery, Cambridge.
In lieu of flowers, memorial contributions may be made to Holy Trinity Armenian Church or Camp Haiastan, P.O. Box C, Franklin, MA 02038.
The post In memory of Walter Vartanian appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post Galstyan warns TRIPP agreement carries sovereignty risks appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>Dear compatriots,
It is simplistic and dangerous to approach TRIPP as merely a transportation project and to build optimism around the economic benefits of transit or the prospect of future prosperity.
TRIPP is, first and foremost, a geopolitical project, and the fundamental question is how Armenia protects its interests, sovereignty, and future.
No matter how much we attempt to avoid the security dimension, I find it unacceptable to separate TRIPP from a comprehensive framework for genuine peace, particularly when Armenian territories remain under occupation, Armenian prisoners continue to be held in Baku, and Azerbaijan imposes new demands on Armenia almost daily.
At least at this stage, no calculations have been presented regarding Armenia’s expected economic gains or the principle of reciprocity.
Beyond the economic considerations, the benefits for Azerbaijan and the Turkic world are enormous and evident. Nakhijevan would gain an unhindered connection to Azerbaijan, a development of historic strategic and geopolitical significance.
Meanwhile, the agreement contains no comparable mechanism defining the nature, scope, or enforceability of the “mutual benefits” promised to Armenia.
Yet a fundamental question remains unanswered: What specific territories will this development encompass?
Exclusive land-use and development rights are being granted for 49 years without clearly identifying the territories concerned.
It relies on a “highly likely” approach.
It is evident that the legal ambiguities contained in the agreement pose serious risks to Armenia’s sovereignty and its ability to exercise effective control.
The Constitutional Court’s favorable opinion fails to address several important legal and constitutional questions.
Sovereignty is not measured by how many times it is reaffirmed on paper, but by the guaranteed existence of mechanisms ensuring effective control over one’s own territory.
The agreement provides for legislative exceptions whose content will be determined through commercial and contractual documents, including provisions concerning the acquisition of privately owned land and other related rights.
You are being asked to vote in favor of and ratify future legislative exceptions without knowing their content, and even before the charter and shareholders’ agreement have been signed or made public.
This raises a fundamental question: If these exceptions concern border protection, customs control, or certain aspects of law enforcement, will Armenia be able to exercise its sovereign authority fully?
In essence, the agreement fails to establish a clear distinction between the powers of the private operator and the functions of the state. Nor does it provide guarantees that Armenia will retain full sovereignty over the relevant territory and infrastructure.
It establishes a 49-year arrangement without guaranteeing future governments any mechanism for reviewing its terms should Armenia’s strategic priorities change.
Without these guarantees, the project could become a strategic threat whose consequences Armenia would be forced to bear for decades.
Naturally, Armenia needs new transportation routes and economic opportunities, but not at the expense of restricting its sovereignty or its freedom to make independent decisions.
I believe our concerns are justified: TRIPP appears to be more of a political arrangement than an agreement providing sustainable legal guarantees.
The post Galstyan warns TRIPP agreement carries sovereignty risks appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post Turkish and Azerbaijani media respond to my article on diaspora vs. Pashinyan appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>However, what happened last week was very unusual. Three Turkish and Azeri media outlets published rebuttals to my article titled “Turkish Research Center Repeatedly Praises Pashinyan and Criticizes the Diaspora.”
The most absurd article, written by Ulash Fakir, was published by ODATV, a Turkish nationalist online news outlet. It was titled “Their Names Were Listed One by One: Four Turkish Women Targeted by Armenians.” There were two major mistakes in the headline alone: 1) They were not targeted “by Armenians,” but by a single Armenian, namely, me; and 2) I did not target any “Turkish women.” I merely responded to the articles written by four Turkish analysts. I did not even know whether they were women or men. I wrote about a political, not a gender-related, issue.
ODATV wrongly referred to “the extensive coverage of [Aygun] Attar’s article by the diaspora press in the U.S.” There was no such thing. There was only one response: mine. ODATV disclosed that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan appointed Attar to his “Security and Foreign Policy Council” in February 2021. Attar’s government post indicates that she cannot be considered an objective analyst on Armenian-Turkish issues.
ODATV went on to introduce the other three Turkish women whom it claims I “targeted.” All four women are highly educated, but that does not mean they are unbiased in their analyses of Armenian issues.
The second rebuttal to my article, written by Abulfaz Babazadeh, was published by NEWS.AZ in Baku, Azerbaijan. It was titled “Why Praise from Baku and Ankara Alarms the Armenian Diaspora.” He is described as “a scientist, a scholar of Japanese studies and a political observer.” It is strange that a “scholar of Japanese studies” would write about an Armenian issue. Much of Babazadeh’s article was lifted verbatim from ODATV’s article, without any acknowledgment of the source. This is plagiarism by a so-called “scholar.”
However, I am pleased that Babazadeh praised parts of my article: “Sassounian deserves credit for identifying a genuine contradiction that is difficult to dismiss. The prime minister asks the diaspora not to interfere in Armenia’s domestic affairs while readily accepting its money for charitable campaigns. His criticism of [Prime Minister Nikol] Pashinyan’s meeting with ASA students rather than the broader Armenian community follows the same logic: engagement is selective rather than institutional. That is a legitimate criticism of the Armenian government — and it is directed at Yerevan, not Ankara.”
At the end of his article, Babazadeh offered several positive suggestions regarding relations among Armenia, the diaspora, Azerbaijan and Turkey:
“The first conclusion concerns tactics. The most effective support for normalization comes through restraint and concrete action. Every enthusiastic paragraph written in Ankara or Baku can become a quotation in Los Angeles. That is not an argument for silence. It is an argument for choosing words more carefully and backing them with tangible steps: opening borders, developing transport projects, expanding trade and strengthening humanitarian contacts.
“The second conclusion is strategic. The main front in the normalization process lies within Armenian politics itself — between the state and the diaspora, between memory and pragmatism. Only Armenians can resolve that debate. Armenia’s neighbors can offer predictability and wait for Yerevan to reach an understanding with its own society.
“The third conclusion is the most important for all sides. If Yerevan fails to create an institution through which the diaspora can influence decisions without blocking them, radical voices will gain a monopoly on the role of defender of the nation. Peace does not require defeating the diaspora. It requires integrating it into a new reality. Türkiye and Azerbaijan can contribute to that process in one crucial way: by avoiding actions or rhetoric that allow the peace agenda itself to be turned into a weapon against normalization.
“Sassounian’s column is written with a sense of grievance, and that grievance carries political meaning. It is a signal that part of the Armenian world feels excluded from the conversation. Ignoring that signal could prove costly. Hearing it — and responding with action rather than praise — could put peace on a much firmer foundation.”
The third rebuttal, written by Aygun Attar, was titled “The Armenian Diaspora’s Real Challenge is not Türkiye, but the Changing Geopolitical Reality. A Response to Harut Sassounian: Diaspora, State Sovereignty and the Future of Peace in the South Caucasus.” The article was published by the Center for Eurasian Studies in Ankara.
Surprisingly, the Turkish analyst Attar is much more positive about the diaspora than Pashinyan: “The Armenian diaspora possesses a deeply rooted historical consciousness, extensive organizational networks and considerable political influence in several countries. Its role in preserving Armenian cultural identity and promoting Armenian causes internationally cannot be dismissed. Diaspora organizations in the United States and France, in particular, have long exercised influence over international discussions concerning Armenia.”
Attar acknowledged that “An Armenian living in Los Angeles, Paris, or elsewhere is fully entitled to advocate historical or political claims.” This is exactly what I have done, not as a representative of the Armenian government, but as a diasporan.
However, Attar omitted two important points from her analysis: First, the discussion is not about one “Armenian living in Los Angeles,” but about millions of Armenians who live around the world. Second, this is not simply a matter of the diaspora vs. the Republic of Armenia, but also of the many Armenians living within Armenia who vehemently oppose Pashinyan’s concessions.
In conclusion, Armenians around the world must be aware that foreign analysts and their governments closely monitor the opinions and declarations of Armenians both inside and outside Armenia.
Azerbaijan and Turkey should know that whatever compromises Pashinyan is making today will be rejected once he leaves office. Therefore, they must understand that these temporary concessions will soon be reversed.
The post Turkish and Azerbaijani media respond to my article on diaspora vs. Pashinyan appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post Panel discussion on the role of media in Armenia on Nov. 10 appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The panel will feature Edik Baghdasaryan, editor-in-chief of Hetq; Aram Arkun, managing editor of the Armenian Mirror-Spectator; and Ara Khatchadourian, executive editor of Asbarez. Dikran Kaligian, managing editor of The Armenian Review, will moderate the discussion.
The event is organized in collaboration with the Armenian Assembly of America, the Armenian National Committee of Eastern Massachusetts and the Tekeyan Cultural Association.
A goal of the visit is to engage with members of the Armenian diaspora, learn how they follow developments in Armenia, understand which sources of information they rely on and identify what information they need to gain a more comprehensive picture of events in their homeland. The conversations will provide an opportunity to exchange perspectives and explore how independent journalism can help bridge the information gap between Armenia and its diaspora.
Founded in 2001, Hetq is an investigative media outlet in Armenia, with 25 years of experience uncovering corruption, abuse of power, misuse of public funds, human rights violations and environmental crises. Its investigations have aimed to contribute to legal proceedings and accountability for wrongdoing. Through its reporting, Hetq has aimed to shape public debate and influence decision-making while building partnerships internationally.
Beyond investigative reporting, Hetq has expressed a commitment to advancing journalism education. Through the Hetq Media Factory, Hetq trains aspiring journalists in investigative reporting to promote professional standards and quality in Armenian journalism.
Hetq reports on issues related to Armenia’s political, social and economic realities. The Boston visit will provide an opportunity to share this work with the diaspora and hear its perspectives and concerns.
The post Panel discussion on the role of media in Armenia on Nov. 10 appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post Interview: The Naghash Ensemble on its 11-city U.S. tour appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post Interview: The Naghash Ensemble on its 11-city U.S. tour appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post The illusion of sovereignty in Armenia appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>The post The illusion of sovereignty in Armenia appeared first on The Armenian Weekly.
]]>